Introduction

Meleager (the Greek form is Meleagros), son of Eukrates, was born in about 140 BC at Gadara, a town just south of the eastern shore of the Sea of Galilee.1 He grew up and was educated at Tyre, the ancicnt Phoenician coastal city, but spent his later life on Kos, the island off the Karian south-west corncr of Asia Minor. He died in old age, probably about 70 BC. He wrote poetry, popular philosophical essays which he called Charites (Graces) in a mixture of prose and verse, and edited an important collection of Greek epigrams known as the Garland. All this can bc gathered from Meleagcr's four autobiographical poems, two of which arc included in this selection (poems 57 and 58). While it is not much to go by, it is more than is known about many Greek poets, although in Mcleager's ease, the information docs not add substantially to one's appreciation of the poems. A little more can bc inferred about his background. Gadara was a Hellenic town, whose Greek-speaking society survived into the Christian era. Meleagcr's parents were certainly of this well-to-do class, even if by origin they were part-Syrian. Meleager was in all probability bilingual, but little that is rccognisably Syrian comes through into the poems; however it is arguable, if unprovable, that Melcager's temperament and stylistic propensities arc Syrian at root rather than Greek. The poem about spring2 perhaps owes something to the landscape of his homeland and even to its folk- poetry (passages of The Song of Songs are a little similar) - but it also recalls the pastoral reliefs of Hellenistic art. It is at least a harmless supposition that Meleager, whose intellectual curiosity led him to make a critical anthology of Greek epigram, was neither wholly ignorant of, nor uninfluenced by his homeland's cultural traditions. Meleager compiled the Garland 011 Kos, an island with a literary tradition of its own, where the third-century BC poets Philitas and Thcokritos had lived. Anthologies of epigram had been made before, but the survival of Meleagcr's at least until the tenth century AD, when the Byzantine Kcphalas incorporated its poems into The Palatine Anthology3, implies that it was one of the best. On balancc, the evidence suggests that Meleager compiled his anthology in the early years of the first century BC.4 It was an extensive collection, containing perhaps 4,000 lines of verse. Meleager's prefatory poem, though not a complete list of the poets included, gives a good idea of its range. Although the Garland concentrated on the poets of the third century, when epigram really came into its own, Meleager also included a large number - perhaps all - the epigrams by earlier poets available to him; there were epigrams from the seventh century (Archilochos) to his own day. Whether he published a separate collection of his own poems is not known; it seems unlikely, since he certainly included the bulk of his verse in the Garland. The Palatine Anthology does not, perhaps, include every poem of Meleager's Garland, but it is clear that there are stretches of poems which Kephalas has lifted wholesale from it. These show that Meleager arranged the poems not by author, but by theme, often alternating between the principal poets in each section, and capping a sequence of earlier poems with one of his own.5 Meleager's editing and arrangement of the Garland make it obvious that he enjoyed an intimate knowledge of all aspects of Greek epigram; that he was conscious both of his place in the tradition, and of his ability to renew and extend it. The scope of Greek epigram, which originally meant a formal verse inscription - usually an epitaph or dedication to a god - had been greatly widened by the early Hellenistic poets such as Asklepiades, so that it became a vehicle for most types of short, personal or public poem, encompassing some areas which,we would now loosely term 'lyric'.6 Meleager was especially fond of capping poems by the two poets with whom he has most in common, Asklepiades and Kallimachos. When he does so, his poem always contains some new combination of motifs, some new refinement to distinguish it from mere imitation. Meleager's originality as a poet lies very much in his inventiveness in combining and adapting old themes into new entities. In doing so he transforms and enlivens the whole genre. Meleager could write equally well with elegant restraint and simplicity, or else with flamboyant elaboration and clever coining of novel compound words. If Coleridge's dictum that poetry is 'the best words in the best order' may be applied anachronistically, Meleager fulfils its terms by exploiting all the natural advantages of his inflected language. The variety of styles he could handle gives his work an air of continuous experiment; he never liked to do the same thing twice. Meleager has sometimes struck critics as too ingenious to be sincere. Gow and Page, for example, seem to adopt a sincerity-of- emotion standard for poetry and question the effectiveness of poem 53 because it seems too consciously composed to be heartfelt. In their preface to Meleager's poems, they write:

The limitations both of matter and of form which he inherited, and which he accepted without question, are such that it seems to us a mis- understanding of the essential nature of his work to call him a 'real poet', or to look for anything 'fresh with joyous experience' [J. A. Symonds' descriptions]. It is hard to say in what literary form a poet of this period (or for long before) would have expressed the profounder personal emotions. Certainly it would not have been the epigram, in which poetry had long been degenerating into a parlour-game. . . . The epigram was a field rather for exercise of the intellect than for display of the emotions. ... It may be admitted that a glimmer of true emotion can be discerned here and there, but it is quite certain that most of the light is artificial.

What mode, then, should a 'real poet' have chosen? Meleager's seems perfectly legitimate to me; there was no alternative but to revive and renew the tradition of epigram. A little later, Catullus found epigram to be the right form for poems which unquestion- ably concern the 'profounder personal emotions'. How, indeed if, emotional sincerity can ever be measured is another problem; it cannot be the primary test of a 'real poet', for many bad poets have been emotionally sincere. One should in any case distinguish between ancient and modern notions of the relationship between art and life. When reading Greek poets one should not assume that the persona or speaker of the poem is necessarily the poet himself; there is a long tradition of impersonal poetry. This is not to say that Meleager's poems are untrue to his feelings; simply that expression of his own emotions is not the purpose of the poems. It would be quite wrong to call Meleager an 'academic' or literary poet merely because he frequently adapts poems by Asklepiades and Kallimachos; this was expected of an epigrammatist. Besides, Meleager's poems are too palpably alive as poems to merit the adjective 'literary' in its derogatory sense. The relationship between his art and his life remains unclear, but we may be sure that Meleager was too good a poet to publish work merely because his 'real' feelings of sexual delectation, frustration etc., had been expressed in a poem. Meleager's poetic authenticity lies in the mastery of every aspect of his medium. He used every mode of epigram and most combina- tions of them: dedicatory, epideictic (descriptive), epitaphic or sepulchral, sympotic and erotic. It is as a love-poet, the area which he most developed, that he is supremely the best of Greek epigram- matists. He employs the whole range of traditional erotic imagery and rings'all the changes on it. He is the first poet to give Eros the role which has become so familiar to us in love-poetry. It would be otiose to give here any detailed account of Meleager's style and technique. It is, however, worth noting his sureness of touch with what Pound termed logopoeia - the modulated tone of his language, now direct and simple, now ironic, or allusive: this is a major feature of Meleager's technique, and failure to recognize the different 'voices' - to distinguish poems like 33, for example, from 55 - would be to miss much of the real poetry. Meleager's imagery is to a great extent connected with the conventions of sympotic poetry, on which see the 'Note on Garlands, Symposia and the Komos'; but his use of the imagery of flowers is nevertheless peculiar to himself, and the imagery of light is also very much his own. Meleager's essays are lost. There are two quotations surviving in Athenaios' miscellany, the Deipnosophistai\ both short enough to quote here. 'Nikion said, "Do none of you ... eat fish? Or is it like what your ancestor Meleager of Gadara, in the work called Charites, said of Homer: that being a Syrian by birth, he accordingly represented the Achaians as abstaining from fish, in keeping with the Syrian practice, though there is an abundance offish around the Hellespont»" ' [Ath. 4.157b]. Discussing the word chytrides (jug, pot): 'The Cynic Meleager also quotes the word, writing this in his Symposion - "and at this juncture, he assigned to him a heavy task - twelve deep pots (chytridia)".' [Ath. 11.502c]. Charites was a collection of miscellaneous essays on philosophical topics, in the form which, through Varro's adaptations, the Romans knew as 'Menippean satire'. In this Meleager followed another Gadarene writer, the third-century Cynic Menippos, who developed this serio-comic style in a mixture of prose and verse for his philosophical essays. Meleager has an important place in literary history as the second main writer in this branch of belles-lettres, but his contribution to it is of course unclear. In the absence of his Charites it is hard to guess what influence his Cynicism had on his poetry. Cynicism was never an organized philosophical school in the way that Epicureanism was; individual Cynics interpreted the principles of Diogenes in their own way. The basic ideal was to lead a simple and self-sufficient (but not necessarily ascetic) life, free from the troubles brought by material possessions. It was very much an apolitical, individualist philosophy, and as such is quite compatible with Meleagei's persona in the poems, which affirm the values of the individual's personal life, almost divorced from the wider social context. The argument from silence should not be pressed beyond this, and perhaps one should say no more than that Meleager's values (in common with the majority of Hellenistic epigrammatists) were very different from, say, the values and concepts of Greek nationhood which informed the poems of Simonides at the time of the wars with Persia. Meleager's Garland was an influential book. Catullus and the Roman elegists had absorbed it, much as English and American poets have absorbed the pioneering modernist poetry of the 1910s and 1920s. Later epigrammatists writing in Greek tended to avoid erotic epignam, perhaps on the grounds that Meleager had temporarily exhausted its possibilities. (One of the few exceptions to this rule is Meleager's compatriot, Philodemos of Gadara, some thirty years younger than Meleager; he began writing too late to be included in the Garland.) Erotic epigram was briefly revived in the sixth century AD with Paulos and the early Byzantine poets. Many of Meleager's themes and some of his spirit has filtered through into English poetry, via such poets as Herrick, who imitated and adapted a few of his poems. This selection contains a little under half of Meleager's surviving verse; it includes all his best and most characteristic poems. The arrangement of the poems (Poems 1-6, Kypris and Eros; 7-19, homosexual poems; 20-33, miscellaneous heterosexual poems; 34-41, poems to Zenophile; 42-53, poems to Heliodora; 54-58, miscellaneous) is meant to be no more than orderly: it should not be read as any kind of pseudo-biographical sequence, nor is it likely to reflect any possible order of composition. My literal versions were made independently of Peter Whigham's verse translations. I should like to express my debt to Mr A. S. F. Gow and Prof. Sir Denys Page, whose commentary on Meleager has been invaluable in the preparation of the literal versions and notes. PETER JAY

•Not the coastal Gadara near Askalon - see H. Ouvré, Méléagre de Gadara, chapter i. "Possibly an early piece : it is his only poem in a metre (the hexameter) other than the elegiac couplet. The text and prose translation are given in the Appendix. 'The Palatine Anthology forms the first fifteen books of modern editions of The Greek Anthology. Book 16 is an appendix of poems omitted by Kephalas but included by Planudes, who re-edited the collection in 1301. 4A marginal note to the Palatine ms. gives Meleager's floruit as 'the reign of the last Seleukos' (96-5 BC). •For a discussion of the date, contents, extent and arrangement of the Garland, see the Introduction to Hellenistic Epigrams, ed. A.S.F. Gow and D.L. Page, vol. 1. •For a brief general survey of the development of Greek epigram, see my Introduction to The Greek Anthology (1973), and the general works mentioned in the Select Bibliography. The Poems oj Meleager